It would be really convenient if they would just integrate phones into our right hands and foreheads.

I agree. I used to use NoScript, RequestPolicy, and BetterPrivacy, but I finally realized I was spending far more time tuning policies than I was actually using the web. And they were TOTALLY unusable by non technically inclined people.

My compromise now is to use uBlock Origin (virtually never breaks anything), HTTPS Everywhere (on rare occasion breaks a site), Self-Destructing Cookies (by design cannot break sites), and 3rd-party cookies disabled.

The only thing that banning 3rd-party cookies broke was CapitalOne360's gateway into regular CapitalOne, but they even managed to fix this in recent months.

Try uMatrix, which combines many of those functions into one extension. It's by the same person as uBlock Origin.

ME operates above typical UEFI firmware. ME updates must be signed by Intel and Intel alone.

    MicroSD Card swapped out. Not more annoying spring ejection system that breaks.

What does this mean? I didn't see anything about this in the announcement.

The cardholder used to be a push-to-eject type, but apparently this was unpopular. Sometimes failing to eject, sometimes too easy to trigger (since it's protruding and not recessed in casework). Now it's just a friction fit.

That's interesting. The original Pi was a friction fit (full-size SD card), but that was unpopular, so they switched to the spring-eject system for Micro-SD. Seems they cannot make up their minds which one they prefer.

(Keeping in mind that laws vary in different nations/states...) Adverse possession laws usually only apply if a squatter takes possession of a property without official title and uses that property for a length of time without being challenged. The principle of adverse possession might apply if Mehta had somehow hijacked the domain records and used the domain for a number of years without Kneen noticing and acting to retake control. Even then, adverse possession does not apply if the squatter used illegal means to obtain or keep control of the property (i.e., a domain hijacking).

But adverse possession does not simply allow one entity to come in, declare the owning entity to not be using a property, and assume legal control. As a land-owning entity, I am not required to "use" my land, and as long as I kick squatters out in a reasonable amount of time, adverse possession does not affect me.

How exactly do you define "doing something" with a domain? The Internet is not just the web and email. I own several domains that have no publicly accessible web sites or email servers; to declare that these domain are unused, however, is ludicrous. Do you advocate creating even more bureaucracy on the Internet by forcing domain owners to jump through hoops implementing some official definition of a "proper domain services" to prove to the public that their names are used? Shouldn't simply paying the recurring registration fee be enough?